[BC] Zoning issues

[Bailey, Scott]

I remember that fight up in NH.  Our local zoning officials were
watching that too. If the FCC isn't going to congress to stand up for
us, who then will?  When it comes to local battles, the FCC wants to
stay out of it.
Mike, this is why I've been an advocate of somebody coming up with new
ways for AM.
I appreciate what Tom King at Kintronics has done with the Kinstar, but
still it's going to require much land that developers want. They are
fighting even in rural areas. I thought the e-h antenna was going to
bring some promises, but when Ted Hart tested it at the local station in
GA, I was told it had a 20 db loss in gain. Not good!
Some one brought up the cross field antenna to me this morning, I think
there is a major difference between the cross field and e-h antennas.

Scott  

-----Original Message-----
From: broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net
[mailto:broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net] On Behalf Of Mike McCarthy
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 9:32 AM
To: Broadcasters' Mailing List
Subject: Re: [BC] Zoning issues

There was a STATE supreme court case in NH which found the local zoning
people can not categorically exclude towers for AM broadcasting. The
court found FCC has specific jurisdiction over their siting and that
reasonable accomodations must be made for the sitng of those towers.

Contact Chris Imlay at SBE about this case. While state case law doesn't
necessarily carry across state lines, there is some consistency because
it involves a certain amount of federal oversight which would cause the
local courts to probably review the local ordinances if challenged.

Right now, Congress is the only vehicle which can categorically by
statute exclude certan towers from local zoning. FCC has PRB-1 for Part
97 towers. But the policy requires only "reasonable accomadation" to
those towers, generally below 60 ft.  FCC has repeatedly said no to
anything more than PRB-1's current pre-emption.

Beyond that, the locals are fighting tooth and nail not to loose the
level of oversight they have now.  And the feds have generally agreed
that zoning/land use is a local issue best left to the locals.

MM

 
> 
> Isn't this something the NAB is working on, to help broadcasters?
> 
> At 10:25 AM 9/20/2006, Bailey, Scott wrote
> >    My station in Gallatin, TN, when we got ready to replace my old
195'
> >wind charger tower, codes came to me and want me to go down to 100'.
At
> >the time, my knowledge of unipoles, was not good, and I was still
> >learning about what top loading was.
> 
> 
> >    This was 1999. Today, Sumner County Codes are trying to stop any
> >tower building at all, including for 2 way emergency use in the UHF
> >band, with is really stupid. WQKR (1270), Portland, TN, was forced
off
> >their licensed tower site by property owner Larry Collins. I think he
> >wanted the towers gone to use the land to expand a factory building
> >nearby..
> >    WQKR former owners went in front of City Codes for a new site
found,
> >and were turned down. They then found a possible site location
outside
> >the City of Portland, in the county. Sumner County said...hell no,
and
> >asking why do you need 2 towers anyway?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
_______________________________________________________________________
> Barry Mishkind     -       Tucson, AZ    -   520-296-3797
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> The BROADCAST [BC] list is sponsored by SystemsStore On-Line Sales
> Cable-Connectors-Blocks-Racks-Wire Management-Test Gear-Tools and
More! 
> www.SystemsStore.com       Tel: 407-656-3719    Sales at SystemsStore.com
> 
> 
Mike McCarthy

Sent from my traveling account.
Please reply to:    
_______________________________________________

The BROADCAST [BC] list is sponsored by SystemsStore On-Line Sales
Cable-Connectors-Blocks-Racks-Wire Management-Test Gear-Tools and More! 
www.SystemsStore.com       Tel: 407-656-3719    Sales at SystemsStore.com